Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Tesla P40

Place in performance ranking	156	249
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	100.00	4.86
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	GP102	N19P-Q3
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	13 September 2016 (7 years ago)	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$5,699	no data
Current price	$131 (0x MSRP)	$2221

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Tesla P40 has 1958% better value for money than T2000 Mobile.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	3840	1024
Core clock speed	1303 MHz	1575 MHz
Boost clock speed	1531 MHz	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	11,800 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	367.4	114.2
Floating-point performance	11,758 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Tesla P40 and Quadro T2000 Mobile compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	8-pin EPS	no data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	7.2 GB/s	8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	347.1 GB/s	128.0 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.7	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.3	1.2.131
CUDA	6.1	7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Tesla P40 32.36
+56.5%

T2000 Mobile 20.68

Tesla P40 outperforms Quadro T2000 Mobile by 56% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Tesla P40 12498
+56.5%

T2000 Mobile 7985

Tesla P40 outperforms Quadro T2000 Mobile by 57% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

50−55
+51.5%

30−35

−51.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +50%	40−45 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +42.9%	35−40 −42.9%
Battlefield 5	100−105 +47.1%	65−70 −47.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +54.8%	40−45 −54.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +51.5%	30−35 −51.5%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +56.3%	45−50 −56.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	85−90 +54.5%	55−60 −54.5%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +50.5%	90−95 −50.5%
Hitman 3	60−65 +46.3%	40−45 −46.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +46.3%	80−85 −46.3%
Metro Exodus	100−105 +44.9%	65−70 −44.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	85−90 +51.8%	55−60 −51.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−105 +47.1%	65−70 −47.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +53.2%	60−65 −53.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +50%	40−45 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +42.9%	35−40 −42.9%
Battlefield 5	100−105 +47.1%	65−70 −47.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +54.8%	40−45 −54.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +51.5%	30−35 −51.5%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +56.3%	45−50 −56.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	85−90 +54.5%	55−60 −54.5%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +50.5%	90−95 −50.5%
Hitman 3	60−65 +46.3%	40−45 −46.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +46.3%	80−85 −46.3%
Metro Exodus	100−105 +44.9%	65−70 −44.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	85−90 +51.8%	55−60 −51.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−105 +47.1%	65−70 −47.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	70−75 +55.6%	45−50 −55.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +53.2%	60−65 −53.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +50%	40−45 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50−55 +42.9%	35−40 −42.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +54.8%	40−45 −54.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +51.5%	30−35 −51.5%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +56.3%	45−50 −56.3%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +50.5%	90−95 −50.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +46.3%	80−85 −46.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−105 +47.1%	65−70 −47.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	70−75 +55.6%	45−50 −55.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +53.2%	60−65 −53.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

85−90
+51.8%

55−60

−51.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +50%	40−45 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +54.8%	40−45 −54.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−33 +42.9%	21−24 −42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 +42.1%	18−20 −42.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 +48.1%	27−30 −48.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +42.9%	35−40 −42.9%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +46.3%	40−45 −46.3%
Hitman 3	35−40 +45.8%	24−27 −45.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	65−70 +54.8%	40−45 −54.8%
Metro Exodus	60−65 +53.8%	35−40 −53.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +51.2%	40−45 −51.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +45.8%	24−27 −45.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21−24 +50%	14−16 −50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

50−55
+47.1%

30−35

−47.1%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +50%	20−22 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +50%	16−18 −50%
Hitman 3	24−27 +50%	16−18 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +52.2%	21−24 −52.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +50%	14−16 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +42.9%	21−24 −42.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +42.9%	27−30 −42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +52.2%	21−24 −52.2%
Metro Exodus	30−33 +50%	20−22 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30
+50%

18−20

−50%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	32.36	20.68
Recency	13 September 2016	27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	60 Watt